Talk:Transportation in New York City/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Mass Transit only

This article seems like it means "Mass Transportation in New York City" -- there is nothing about bridges and streets. Should small sections like this be added that link to the main articles? --Quasipalm 19:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

US Collaboration of the Week

The Transportation in New York City article is nominated as the United States Collaboration of the Week and deserves recognition for all the work that has been done to get this article up to snuff, and maybe ultimately to Featured article status. It's got potential: a compelling topic; thorough coverage of the material; better crafted sections linking to main articles; interesting pictures. Now all it needs is votes! As of now, West Viriginiadsfibsdfbsuifbyduiofgbuifgusydfgouigg has 12 votes, Rhode Island has 11 and TransNYC has just 3!?!? Rhode Island? West Virginia? Fuggedaboutit! Show your support and vote! C'mon, this is New York we're talking about. Once these other articles have been honored we need to have the votes for future recognition. Alansohn 13:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

"Two of every three"?

"Life in the city is so dependent on the subway that New York City is home to two of only three 24 hour subway systems in the world."

So NYC is home to two subway systems? Can somebody explain this? Massysett 19:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Wait, I see: it's PATH. Massysett 19:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, if you want to count PATH as a "subway" system. I don't think I could find 10 people in New York who consider PATH as a subway system, or even a subway line. I suppose one can't really think of it as commuter rail, though, or even light rail. —Larry V. 04:52, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

NPOV

This article paints a very one-side picture of how wonderful NYC transit is, while completely ignoring the very real problems NYC transit has. A more balanced view of things should be presented. -- RoySmith (talk) 05:08, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I wrote up the following on the collaboration vote page; I'm copying it here for reference. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I was asked to come here and vote for this. Well, OK, but you may not like what I've got to say. I think it's a terrible article. This is not an encyclopedia article, it's a public relations puff piece. It tells a one-sided story of how wonderful NYC transit is. It completely ignores the fact that the subways are crowded, noisy, often dirty, and sometimes dangerous. The outer boroughs are poorly served (especially if your goal is to go anywhere except into Manhattan). We've only recently managed to get any kind of rail service to JFK, and it's still not a single seat ride, and there's still nothing to LaGuardia. They've been promising to build the 2nd Ave subway all my life, and still no progress (yes, I know about the most recent promises, but when I say progress, I'm talking holes in the ground, not words on a page). The pictures, while fine examples of artistic photography, show a carefully selected view of the cleanest, newest, and spiffiest. The Taxi section paints an idealistic view of things as well -- real NYC taxis tend to be run-down, furnished inside with bullet-proof partitions and a decor which is best described as "industrial", and regardless of the rules, the drivers often refuse fares to sections of the city they don't want to go to.

Yeah, I know, it's not all quite as horrible as I make it out in the above paragraph, but neither is it the fantasy land this article makes it out to be. The entreatment to come here and vote said, It tells a fascinating story, and I think that hits the problem right on the head. This is an encyclopedia. It's supposed to provide information, not tell a story. I think the authors of this article got so caught up in telling a good story (which they have), that they lost sight of the fact that they're supposed to be writing an encyclopedia article.

I'd like to add that you're not being asked to vote for this article to become a featured article -- you're being asked to vote for it to become part of a collaboration for improvement. I agree with you that some of the warts of NYC transit should be noted, but I don't see this as a reason not to vote, i see it as a reason to vote. --Quasipalm 19:37, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Of course we need to keep articles like this from sounding like an advertisement of the NYC visitors/convention bureau. If this article becomes COTW, I can contribute some about the construction of the highway network, during the era of Robert Moses (not always favorably viewed). And, it sounds like you have much to add to the article, with a different, more critical (and needed) perspective. -Aude (talk | contribs) 19:47, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
If you're unsatisifed with the article, all the MORE reason to vote for it. I disagree that it's a "puff piece". The article is built on statistics and comparisons drawn with other American cities to help the reader understand what's unique about the NYC transit system. An endless bitchy tirade by an irritable New Yorker who wants to complain about the lack of a one seat ride from JFK should try the "one seat ride" out of LAX or any other big city American airport: 4 hours of auto gridlock. There's something a little arrogant in your position. Why don't you read the transportation section in the Houston article before you make your judgements. Houston is an unbelievably polluted mess. Of course, the authors there white washed the whole thing, going so far as to cheerfully describe traffic and sprawl as positive signs of growth. The NYC article doesn't come even close to this kind of posturing. Anyway, better yet, fix the egregious flaws you see. Why waste space describing the subway system's complexity and unique features that make it different from America's multidudes of more gleaming, shinning, comprehensive, swift, well-financed, trouble-free subways -- better to just have three spiteful pissy paragraphs about grime, graffiti, smell, noise, passengers with bad BO, the dirt of the floor, the smudges on the windows, and how you got on an express instead of a local and missed your stop this morning. We're all fascinated and would much rather hear about this than how the only transportation system in the country that isn't majoritarian auto-based makes life in NYC possible. Mfk91 22:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Yellow Cabs

21Jan2006. Below is from: "http://www.barrypopik.com/article/997/taxi-the-word-taxicab-and-the-yellow-color" Taxi (the word "taxicab" and the "yellow" color) It has been said that Harry N. Allen coined the word “taxicab” in the fall of 1907, and that he also introduced the color “yellow” to his vehicles. I think that’s wrong on both counts.

Paris and then London both had “taxicabs” before they were introduced to New York in October 1907. The word “taxi” is short for “taximeter.”

Harry Allen’s cabs were red. The W. C. P. Taxicab Company introduced the yellow cab in New York in the spring of 1909." Sources are quoted and the 1909 date does pop-up elsewhere and conflicts with main article. CJ.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Taxicab" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.255.16.66 (talk • contribs)

Semi-formal section

Hi,

I've just added a new section on semi-formal transportation in New York City. I'm VERY surprised that no one has posted about the semi-formal sector of the NY transportation industry. Feel free to ask more questions. I can probably provide an entire article about Chinese vans fairly quickly as I tend to take them from time to time despite my utter lack of Cantonese or Mandarin skills. Abenamer 07:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd *love* to see detailed information about where dollar vans stop, how much they cost, how to identify which ones are legal, and any sort of schedule or hours of service they might keep.

taxi medallion prices

A NYC taxi driver told me you have to pay around 100,000 $ for a medallion license alone, but then can keep it for your lifetime. Are these facts basically true? --Abdull 03:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

A google search on "nyc taxi medallion price" brings up several recent articles that say the going rate is about $200,000; otherwise, yes.--agr 04:43, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Weasel

Apparently, the bridge is arguably one of the most influential in US History. Seems like the vehicles on it are now powdered by weasels, not powered by diesel. I didn't know how to re-word this, so added a template.--martianlostinspace 10:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Additional Avenues

The article states that the avenues run from 1st avenue in the east to 12th in the west. This is not entirely accurate since there are avenues A, B, C, D to the east of first for a large section of Manhattan below 14th Street. Also, the article states that the streets run from 1st street downtown to 220th street uptown. There are actually dozens of streets further downtown beyond 1st street.

"It is a system of superlatives"

Wow, a bit like this article - it's one of the most sycophantic things I've read on wikipedia. Isn't there meant to be some sort of balanced representation? Maybe we should look at this from someone elses point of view. Or maybe that of a neutral third party, that'd be novel. Prehaps the wikipedia community could invent some kind of acronym and policy describing this process?

Hmm, maybe it's not worth getting my hopes up. 137.222.136.208 16:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)